---
title: "The Studio"
year: 2025
kind: "series"
canonical: "https://film.one/tv/the-studio"
fi1m_id: "the-studio"
imdb_id: "tt23649128"
tmdb_id: 247767
wikidata_id: "Q125185497"
fi1m_score: 84
critics_score: 88
critics_reviews: 9
published: "2026-09-12"
updated: "2026-09-12T19:54:35.314148+00:00"
region: "SE"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# The Studio (2025)

Created by Peter Huyck, Alex Gregory, Seth Rogen, Frida Perez, Evan Goldberg · Statens medieråd Från 15 år · Comedy, Drama

## Identity

The Studio

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/tv/the-studio
- **Type:** Series
- **Fi1m ID:** the-studio
- **IMDb ID:** tt23649128
- **TMDB ID:** 247767
- **Wikidata ID:** Q125185497
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt23649128/, https://www.themoviedb.org/tv/247767, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q125185497

**Fi1m score: 84** · Critics 88 from 9 reviews

*In a sentence:* Hollywood might get more films made if everyone stopped explaining how much they loved cinema

> Directors Rogen’s Hollywood farce is funny, tightly performed and sometimes exhausting. The cast make the panic worth enduring, although the programme grows too pleased with its own industry to be quite as ruthless as it first appears.

## Synopsis

Directors Rogen plays Matt Remick, a studio executive trying to reconcile his enthusiasm for cinema with the commercial demands of Hollywood. His working life becomes a succession of professional embarrassments as artistic ambition meets the business of getting films made. Catherine O’Hara plays Patty Leigh, alongside Ike Barinholtz as Sal Saperstein, Chase Sui Wonders as Quinn Hackett and Kathryn Hahn as Maya Mason. Bryan Cranston appears as Griffin Mill, while Ron Howard, Peter Berg and Steve Buscemi play versions of themselves. The series follows the people making decisions behind the camera, with industry disputes turning into workplace farce.

## Review

*The Studio* is a funny, exactingly performed workplace farce, and we recommend it with a warning about the amount of embarrassment involved. Its subject is the Hollywood executive who loves cinema and still has to make commercial decisions, a predicament Directors Rogen makes convincingly uncomfortable as Matt Remick. Directors Rogen and Evan Goldberg understand how quickly enthusiasm can become an excuse to interfere. The comedy comes from watching professional authority offer no protection against looking foolish.

The scripts, credited to Alex Gregory, Peter Huyck, Rogen, Goldberg and Frida Perez, get plenty of mileage from that problem. These people know enough about films to recognise artistic ambition and enough about the business to make it difficult. A less affectionate satire might simply declare them enemies of cinema and be done with it. Here, their love of the work makes the commercial compromises more embarrassing, although it also gives the programme a fairly reliable way of forgiving them.

Rogen makes Matt’s anxiety legible even when the farce becomes broad. Catherine O’Hara’s Patty Leigh and Kathryn Hahn’s Maya Mason are particularly welcome when the writing threatens to overwork an embarrassment. Ike Barinholtz plays Sal Saperstein and Chase Sui Wonders plays Quinn Hackett; together, they keep the professional chaos from feeling like a solo performance. The supporting performances remain sharp even when an individual joke has started to run out.

Adam Newport-Berra’s cinematography supplies the most effective formal choice: long takes that keep us inside Matt’s mounting panic. We laughed, then felt worn out by the embarrassment, because the camera would not give him or us a breather. Rogen and Goldberg allow situations to keep developing within the shot, so a mistake cannot simply disappear behind a reaction cut. Eric Kissack’s editing works around that sustained movement, and the pace is usually brisk without making the confusion hard to follow.

Composer Antonio Sánchez’s music suits the pace, though the combined effect of sound, movement and embarrassment can become tiring. Julie Berghoff’s production design supplies a credible workplace for all this professional foolishness. The environment stays persuasive even when the behaviour becomes extravagant. That helps when a scene asks us to take a professional calamity seriously enough to find it funny.

The weaknesses are familiar ones for a comedy made by people who know their subject this well. Guest appearances by Ron Howard, Peter Berg and Steve Buscemi make the industry’s willingness to participate part of the entertainment, but recognition is not always a sufficient joke. There are flat stretches when the frantic movement starts to feel like a way of keeping us from noticing that the situation has stopped becoming funnier. More seriously, the affection for Hollywood can make us wonder how much bad behaviour the programme is prepared to excuse.

Among workplace comedies, its distinction is how closely it ties the panic to a sincere enthusiasm for the work. Across the first season’s ten episodes, the variations in style help prevent the busy approach from becoming entirely predictable. It does not require specialist knowledge of film production, though recognising the guests is plainly part of the pleasure. Choose it when there is enough energy left in the evening for other people’s professional disasters.

*Fi1m score 84, published 12 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

The reviews are uniformly positive about The Studio, with praise clustering around its cast, cameos and energetic Hollywood farce. Most critics find that its affection for cinema gives the industry jokes substance, particularly when artistic ambitions collide with commercial demands. The supporting performances draw repeated approval, while the long takes earn praise for sustaining the chaos and keeping viewers close to the protagonist’s panic. The comedy’s insider knowledge is widely seen as an asset.

The differences concern how consistently funny and warm it is, rather than whether it works. The Independent praises the laughs and momentum but finds tenderness in short supply, a reservation that contrasts with the warmth detected elsewhere. Empire notes a few flat stretches amid the successful satire. Enthusiasm ranges from solid approval to emphatic praise; there is no outright dissent, though the stressful cringe humour is a more prominent feature of some assessments than others.

## Straight answers

**Is The Studio worth watching?**

*The Studio* is worth watching for anyone who can stand ten episodes of professional embarrassment, and we scored it 84. Rogen's Hollywood farce is funny and tightly performed, with Catherine O'Hara and Kathryn Hahn especially welcome when a joke starts to run long. It suits an evening with energy to spare, and it forgives its industry more readily than it first appears to.

**How long is The Studio, and what is it rated?**

*The Studio* is rated Från 15 år by the Statens medieråd in Sweden. It is a comedy and drama series.

**Where can I watch The Studio in Sweden?**

*The Studio* is streaming on Apple TV and Amazon Prime Video in Sweden. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**How violent or frightening is The Studio, and is it suitable for children?**

*The Studio* is not violent or frightening; its discomfort comes from watching a studio executive humiliate himself at work, filmed in long takes that give nobody a breather. The UK 15 certificate points to adult language and adult workplace behaviour rather than anything graphic. It is a comedy for adults and older teenagers, not for children, and the squeamish about embarrassment may find it tiring.

**How does The Studio compare to The Thick of It?**

*The Studio* is the warmer of the two, a Hollywood farce that plainly loves the industry it mocks, where [*The Thick of It*](https://film.one/tv/the-thick-of-it) holds its politicians in something closer to contempt. The British series has the more inventive verbal cruelty and is the more ruthless; the American one has the more sympathetic lead and the fonder view of its workplace. Choose the earlier programme if you want the panic without the affection.

**What should I watch after The Studio?**

After *The Studio*, try [*The Thick of It*](https://film.one/tv/the-thick-of-it) (2005, Fi1m 94): Workplace panic with less affection for the institution and more inventive verbal cruelty. Then [*The Player*](https://film.one/film/the-player) (1992, Fi1m 85): Hollywood self-preservation treated with a colder eye and a sharper sense of danger.

### Reviews we read (11)

- **The Telegraph** (5/5): The critic calls it a star-packed triumph that skewers and celebrates Hollywood with screwball capering, toe-curling cringiness and razor-sharp one-liners. The mix of authenticity, love for the industry and exceptional supporting cast is highlighted. [Read](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/the-studio-apple-tv-review/)
- **The Times**, Tim Glanfield (★★★★★): The critic hails it as the best comedy of the year so far, a hilarious and insightful look at Hollywood with satire, star cameos and a heartfelt tribute to cinema. The show's love for the medium and exceptional results are singled out. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/tv-radio/article/the-studio-review-seth-rogen-pl9pmhm56)
- **The Hollywood Reporter**, Angie Han (90/100, inferred): The critic finds the cringe humor intense and stressful but hilarious, making it a strong contender for best new comedy. Praises the long takes that immerse viewers in the protagonist's panic and the sincere love of cinema amid commercial pressures. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-reviews/the-studio-review-seth-rogen-apple-tv-1236158297/)
- **Variety**, Alison Herman (85/100, inferred): The critic praises the series as a shrewd send-up of modern Hollywood, highlighting its ironic self-indulgence, strong performances, and effective use of long takes to capture the absurdity of the movie business. It singles out the contrast between artistic ambitions and commercial realities for praise. [Read](https://variety.com/2025/tv/reviews/the-studio-review-seth-rogen-hollywood-satire-1236346781/)
- **Vulture** (80/100, inferred): The showbiz satire marries farce with palpable warmth toward the Hollywood world it lampoons, resulting in genuine and heartfelt comedy. It embraces its own stupidity through broad setups and constant motion, finding new laughs while paying homage to the industry it mocks. [Read](https://www.vulture.com/article/the-studio-seth-rogen-apple-series-review.html)
- **The Independent**, Nick Hilton (75/100, inferred): The review describes it as a blistering new comedy with a star-studded cast and relatable lead that delivers laugh-out-loud moments and big kinetic energy. They single out the kinetic energy and self-aware parody for praise while noting it is short on tenderness. [Read](https://independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/the-studio-review-seth-rogen-apple-tv-b2718763.html)
- **Empire**, Nick de Semlyen: The critic finds it a fizzy, acidic send-up of movie-industry shenanigans that is largely triumphantly funny, praising the witty satire and cameos while noting a few flat stretches. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/tv/reviews/the-studio/)
- **The Guardian**: The critic praises the show's unimpeachably brilliant cast and astonishing guest stars for creating wonderful chaos in a tale of a studio executive's calamitous climb. The fast, furious and farcical episodes are singled out for their insider jokes and good humour. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/mar/26/the-studio-review-seth-rogens-hollywood-satire-is-fast-furious-and-beautifully-fun)
- **NME**, Paul Bradshaw (5/5): The critic calls it the sharpest, funniest show of 2025 so far, a self-loathing love letter to Hollywood with a starry cast and technical flair that balances satire with genuine passion for cinema. [Read](https://www.nme.com/reviews/tv-reviews/the-studio-review-seth-rogen-evan-goldberg-3847584)
- **/Film**, Rafael Motamayor (85/100, inferred): The series stands out as a sharp, loving Hollywood satire in the vein of Entourage but updated for the Film Twitter era, excelling where The Franchise fell short. It mixes inside-baseball industry jabs with genuine affection for cinema, highlighted by strong cameos and a deep understanding of modern moviemaking. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/1819470/the-studio-apple-better-than-hbo-entourage/)
- **Collider**, Ross Bonaime (8/10): The Studio is a smart, funny satire of Hollywood with an incredible cast led by a fantastic Seth Rogen, who shows new depth alongside his signature humor. Each episode has a distinct style, the cameos feel essential, and it builds to something that leaves viewers hoping for more seasons. [Read](https://collider.com/the-studio-review-seth-rogen-apple-tv/)

## Details

- **Created by:** Peter Huyck, Alex Gregory, Seth Rogen, Frida Perez, Evan Goldberg
- **Creator:** Peter Huyck, Alex Gregory, Seth Rogen, Frida Perez, Evan Goldberg
- **Director:** Evan Goldberg, Seth Rogen
- **Writer:** Alex Gregory, Peter Huyck, Frida Perez, Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg
- **Cinematography:** Adam Newport-Berra
- **Editor:** Eric Kissack
- **Music:** Antonio Sánchez
- **Production design:** Julie Berghoff
- **Costume design:** Kameron Lennox
- **Producer:** Jesse Sternbaum
- **Cast:** Seth Rogen as Matt Remick; Catherine O'Hara as Patty Leigh; Ike Barinholtz as Sal Saperstein; Chase Sui Wonders as Quinn Hackett; Kathryn Hahn as Maya Mason; Ron Howard as Ron Howard; Peter Berg as Peter Berg; Steve Buscemi as Steve Buscemi
- **Certificate (Statens medieråd):** Från 15 år
- **Release (Sweden):** 25 March 2025
- **Genres:** Comedy, Drama
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIQuE7JGXU8

## Where to watch in Sweden

- Apple TV: streaming, uhd
- Amazon Prime Video: add-on, uhd

*Checked 2026-09-12.*

Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HU, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PH, PL, PT, SE, SG, TH, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## If you liked this

- *Living in Oblivion* (1995): For filmmaking disasters on a smaller scale, with just as much wounded pride.
- *Day for Night* (1973): Another affectionate account of filmmaking, with more patience for the people doing it.
- *The Thick of It* (2005), Fi1m 94: Workplace panic with less affection for the institution and more inventive verbal cruelty. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/tv/the-thick-of-it.md)
- *The Player* (1992), Fi1m 85: Hollywood self-preservation treated with a colder eye and a sharper sense of danger. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-player.md)
- *One Cut of the Dead* (2017): A different route into filmmaking chaos, best approached knowing as little as possible.

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/tv/the-studio